No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 October 2009
Good Syr: my last to you was of the first of lune, as I take it, at least no longer agoe. wherin I did acquainte you with such occurrentes as then did happen amongest us. yester night I receaved two from you, thon of the 9 of Aprill, thother meant for mr Lea, but directed to me of the 16 of the same: I see by boath how much we are behouldinge unto you, boath for your payns in out affayres, as alsoe for the good advise you give how heere we should follow our busines, for my own parte, I doe what I can, & will not cease hereafter to sett forward the cause all that lieth in me: although we be reasonable well combyned, yeat fewe we have that will take payns, which it may be is the occasion that you receave so few relations as you doe: in my last I towld you how d Bushop was taken; and in this you shall receave a part of his letter to me by which you may partly understand how it fareth with hyme.
434 AAW A X, no. 58.
435 George Birkhead.
436 On the day before he was due to leave England for France, William Bishop had been arrested by the renegade secular priest Anthony Rouse. He was sent to Newgate prison. On 30 May 1611 Birkhead believed that £100 would have secured his release but it could not be raised, AAW A X, no. 5. Richard Smith said that Bishop had nobly refused to secure his release by offering a bribe, AAW A X, no. 52. Birkhead noted that though Bishop had written against George Abbot's brother Robert, and now refused George Abbot's demand that he should take the oath of allegiance ‘geving many sufficieant reasons why it ought not to be taken’, George Abbot had actually said Bishop's reasons were ‘the best he had heard for the denial therof’. Bishop had offered to ‘sweare to his maiesstie all the temporall allegiance that can be exacted of any Christian subiect’; James approved of his answer, AAW A X, no. 51 (pp. 125–6). Smith repeated the point about Abbot's approval but said that ‘ytt is so calumniated as though he had said that he thought the oathe lauful which is very false’, AAW A X, no. 52 (p. 129). Birkhead said Bishop ‘found no other favour but to be sent free prisoner to the gathouse, where he remaineth with much credit amongst Catholiques for his absolute answer against the oath, yet not without hope of being shortly banished’, AAW A X, no. 51 (p. 126). Bishop's examination in the State Papers records that he refused to take the oath. His main reason was that he did not want to damage the credit of the secular clergy at Rome in their battle with SJ, PRO, SP 14/63/74. Bishop later claimed that he was delivered ‘out of prison against Cantreburyes will…who is well knowen to beare mee…deadly hatred…because I writing aga[in]st his brother [Robert Abbot] touched their beggarly descent’, AAW A XII, no. 138 (p. 309). See Milward, II, 139–42.Google Scholar
437 This letter has not survived.
438 Henry Mayhew, Edward Kenion, John Thules and John Gennings OFM. See Letter, 14Google Scholar. Kenion was released into exile in February 1612, though he appears to have returned to England by September 1615, Letter 22; TD V, p. ccii. (Matthew Kellison attempted in 1614 to use Kenion and Joseph Haynes as replacements for Edward Weston and William Singleton at Douai, Allison, ‘Later Life’, 115–16.) Like Richard Smith, Kenion enjoyed the patronage of Armand-Jean du Plessis, Bishop of Luçon, the future Cardinal-Duc de Richelieu. (Anthony Champney had been offered this place in the bishop's retinue before Kenion, but the other members of the Paris writers' college would not allow him to take it up, AAW A XI, no. 113; Letter 32.) Birkhead recounted that Henry Mayhew ‘denied the oath direcdy, and for sayinge it was absurd and that no Christian could take yt, the b [George Abbot] told him he deserved to be hanged’. Mayhew was imprisoned in Newgate. But ‘mr kenyon answeringe in the b Conceit more moderately was sent to the Clinck’ (i.e. where the principal Catholic clerical favourers of the oath were incarcerated), AAW A X, no. 51 (p. 125).
439 John Gennings OFM. He refused the oath and was sent to Newgate, TD IV, p. clxx.
440 Not identified. On 1 June 1611 Benjamin Norton listed various priests who had recently been arrested and released for cash payments, including his ‘neighbour M.r Michael’ for £40. John Floyd SJ and John Falconer SJ had paid larger sums to remain at liberty, AAW A X, nos 52, 61 (p. 165).
441 Thomas Fitzherbert.
442 John (Augustine) Bradshaw OSB.
443 The Cassinese congregation of OSB.
444 Possibly a reference to Morgan Clennock, who had become an assistant to George Blackwell in 1600.
445 Pope Paul V.
446 Birkhead wrote to More on 6 October 1611 that Robert (Anselm) Beech OSB had shown ‘a peece’ of the recently martyred John Roberts OSB to Paul V; ‘I could shew him the whole heades both of Mr Cadwallader and Mr Napper, yf tyme & place wold permitt me which though they be not in my handes, yet can I make good means to fynde them out’, AAW A IX, no. 81 (p. 273). On 20 May 1612 Birkhead reported that Lewis Vaughan, who was about to set out for Rome (see Letter 56), was the man that ‘got the Iewell of mr Cadwall, and perhaps…both it, and mr nappers may follow him in winter next’. Birkhead thought More and Vaughan should present them ‘to the highest’, because Vaughan ‘ventured his life three tyme for one of them, yett his desyre will be to bringe’ Cadwallader's head ‘back, because the Countrie will take it in evill part to be deprived wholly therof’, AAW A XI, no. 83 (p. 237).
447 George Fisher.
448 No copy of this letter survives in AAW.
449 Edward Bennett wrote to Paul V on 13 June 1611, TD V, pp. cxlvii–l.
450 Robert (Anselm) Beech OSB.
451 In May 1611 Birkhead was furious with ‘the Italian benedictins for denyinge to send our Letters, and much more at mr beach for yeeldinge to the humor of others against our proceedings, havinge receyved so much kyndnes of me’, AAW A X, no. 51 (p. 125).
452 Thomas Worthington.
453 The seculars' perceptions of Worthington varied quite a lot. According to Birkhead in November 1610 Worthington had conceded that Douai College ought to be reformed, though his plan for priests to live in community there was unsuitable, AAW A IX, no. 86; cf. Belvederi, 224. Robert Pett in June 1611 was impressed with Worthington's concession that there should be a visitation made of the college, AAW A X, no. 77. Champney thought Worthington was infinitely preferable to other pro-Jesuit seculars such as John Knatchbull (whom it was rumoured would be made president in Worthington's place), AAW A X, no. 109. And in September 1611 Smith thought Worthington reasonably cooperative, AAW A X, no. 117. At the end of February 1612 Champney noted that Worthington had preached ‘upon St Thomas his day lamentinge muche the want of Bishopes in our countrie…which ys an argument that he ys of another opinione then heretofore’, AAW A XI, no. 29 (p. 76). In March 1612 Edward Kenion expressed the view that Worthington was now free of Jesuit influence, Letter 22.
454 They were John Warham, Lewis Williams and Francis Greaves, CRS 10, 110. Bennett believed that they were dismissed because they had, with seventeen others, supported a scholar whom Worthington had expelled, AAW A X, no. 58 (p. 159). Worthington claimed he had sent them away only temporarily, AAW A X, no. 77. Birkhead thought Warham was of ‘good understandinge’, AAW A X, no. 97 (p. 274). The three students wrote to More on 4 May 1611 (NS), AAW A X, no. 42.
455 Mary Talbot, Countess of Shrewsbury, was sent to the Tower, CSPD 1611–18, 48.Google Scholar
456 Anthony Maria Browne, second Viscount Montague.
457 See Letter 15.
458 Lady Elizabeth Dormer.
459 Robert Jones SJ. See Letter 15.
460 John Bennett.
461 Birkhead had written to More in January 1611 that Cadwallader ‘remained the same man at his death as he was before, as may appeare by a Letter which he wrote to mr Iohn bennett after he was in prison’, a letter which Birkhead had sent to the priest John Jackson and which he expected Jackson would pass on, AAW A X, no. 3 (p. 7). Jackson had translated this letter into Latin ‘out of the copie which he [Cadwallader] wrate with his owne hand, and which our Superiour hath in his keeping’, AAW A IX, no. 125 (p. 396).